Re: should we allow users with a predefined role to access pg_backend_memory_contexts view and pg_log_backend_memory_contexts function?gr - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: should we allow users with a predefined role to access pg_backend_memory_contexts view and pg_log_backend_memory_contexts function?gr
Date
Msg-id CAOuzzgqFwfVuo6sxG8aom35-4=56rQ+tiXLKX=jVQ=EVBBOA7g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: should we allow users with a predefined role to access pg_backend_memory_contexts view and pg_log_backend_memory_contexts function?gr  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 03:54 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:15:16AM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> IMO, we can just retain the "if (!superuser())" check in the
> pg_log_backend_memory_contexts as is. This would be more meaningful as
> the error "must be superuser to use raw page functions" explicitly
> says that a superuser is allowed. Whereas if we revoke the permissions
> in system_views.sql, then the error we get is not meaningful as the
> error "permission denied for function pg_log_backend_memory_contexts"
> says that permissions denied and the user will have to look at the
> documentation for what permissions this function requires.

I don't really buy this argument with the "superuser" error message.
When removing hardcoded superuser(), we just close the gap by adding
in the documentation that the function execution can be granted
afterwards.  And nobody has complained about the difference in error
message AFAIK.  That's about extensibility.

Agreed.

Thanks,

Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: should we allow users with a predefined role to access pg_backend_memory_contexts view and pg_log_backend_memory_contexts function?gr
Next
From: Bharath Rupireddy
Date:
Subject: Re: Inconsistency in startup process's MyBackendId and procsignal array registration with ProcSignalInit()